Contributors

Monday, July 09, 2007

Our Girl Friday

In the 1940 screwball comedy, His Girl Friday, Rosalind Russell plays Hildy Johnson, a star reporter for the Morning Post in Chicago. On her way out the door for a quiet family life, Walter Burns, played by Cary Grant, coaxes her back to the paper for one final story. As the film progresses, the audience realizes that Hildy is born to do one thing and one thing alone: write the truth.

In the end, all of us (and Cary Grant) thank God that she sticks around because she uncovers a city wide corruption ring that was almost responsible for hanging an innocent man.

I guess I feel that way about Joanne Tucker. She is Our Girl Friday and I thank God she has been sticking around the Middle East for the past few years.

After studying languages and politics in England, Joanne started her career at the BBC in the 1990s where she worked her way up assignment production & reporting for seven years. Directly after the 9-11 attacks she went to work for Al Jazeera, working directly under the editor in chief at the network. She ran their temporary web site for the war, in English in 2003, which received a lot of US attention including feature articles in the Wall Street Journal, NY Times, LA Times & Chicago Tribune. In 2004, she left Al Jazeera to produce and direct the film I have been talking about for the last two weeks, Breakdown.

I have gotten to know Joanne rather well over the last month and, without a doubt, she, like the character of Hildy Johnson, is a person of great intelligence and integrity who tells the truth about our country, which these days seems to be a bitter pill for many of us to swallow. I thought it would be interesting to inaugurate my first ever interview with someone like Joanne.

This is Part One.

M: You have told me that you made this film because you were surprised at how little Americans know about their own country let alone what is going on in the world. Is that the main reason why you made this film? Are there others?

J: The film from the start and in many ways made itself. I was looking for the behind the superficial headlines facts about US foreign policy in the Middle East and beyond. I was looking at why 'Terrorism' and who that specifically refers to in our 21st century foreign policy had replaced Communism as America's new greatest enemy and those facts emerged from people who deal with, analyze or face them on a daily basis in their lives and work.

When you watch the News, do you really understand what's going on? No. For most Americans, who don't already have a continuous book-informed, first-hand or in depth knowledge about the region policies or events being broad brushed in a 90 second TV report, 30 seconds of which is about making the reporter or anchor look good or impressively knowledgeable when that's rarely the case, the ordinary viewer's knowledge is not advanced and often becomes more skewed and biased based on inaccurate information or politically motivated sound bytes.

Many news channels and particularly when it comes to US global economic interests, in which those networks are direct stakeholders, or matters deemed for or against national security by the political players, have no desire or intention to spread facts. The facts and big picture accuracy are low-priority and expendable, because they are not in the News but the propaganda business.

So commercial, corporate (and inherently politicized) TV News networks are rarely about informing you the viewer -- unless it's an ultra-trivial subject when you'll get unasked for details and analysis coming out of your ears -- but not those topics or subjects where American lives and billions are at stake.


M:The Perkins segment is staggering. He has a new book out called The Secret History of the American Empire. Do you agree completely with what he says? Is the US government that awful in its economic policies in the rest of the world? Why do you suppose that is?

J: What he reveals in the film, as a former NSA-insider is logical and completely in sync with any military and economic superpower's overt and covert actions backed by considerable budgets. In other words, the US is simply behaving as a superpower empire, like so many before it, economically, military, diplomatically and through the use of global military-political proxies.

Two things stand out however and are very noteworthy. The Unites States exists as a nation today out and was born out of the imperative to defend universal human values including equal economic opportunities regardless of religion or race, impose judicial accountability and equality of all before laws, erase political favoritism or constitutional elitism and stamp out imperial arrogance and overreach in world affairs. And two, there has never in all of history been a bigger superpower from every angle including but not limited to, the spread and number of global military bases, pay-rolled proxy regimes worldwide, military lethality and destructive power, corporate economic monopolies of public assets directed by US-led international institutions & the redirection of global wealth and resources into US capital, equity (stock) markets and the dollar currency. So there is a giant and growing gap between rhetoric and reality, cause and result.

M: So if the US "exists as a nation today out and was born out of the imperative to defend universal human values including equal economic opportunities regardless of religion or race, impose judicial accountability and equality of all before laws, erase political favoritism or constitutional elitism and stamp out imperial arrogance and overreach in world affairs" how is it that this definition of the US "soul" if you will is perverted by men like Bush/Cheney etc..?Why is this happening? Is it simple greed? Or something more?

J: Why is it happening? Simple. There is no soul without a mind or heart to work with and guide it. The Founding fathers including Washington and countless independence politicians of stature gave numerous warnings of the end of democracy and beginning of tyranny when the people are not informed or involved in their leaders' decision-making. No democracy can survive for long without an informed public acting as the conscience and constituency of mainly unscrupulous politicians and without a rigorous Legislative or Judicial branch doing its job, doing it with justice and in the public eye for the greater good.

For at least thirty years and I would say after the mid 70s, politicians have learnt the WRONG lessons from those years, what they have learnt is NOT to get caught next time. The media giants work for them not to inform or educate the public, leaders and politicians including in Congress work for unelected unaccountable companies whom they will join once their employment contract in the White House or DoD is over and whose bottom line is maximizing profit at any cost: human cost, including loss of jobs, extreme polarization of wealth, the loss of global democracies, cultural independence and the earth for future generations.

So, why is the soul perverted by people like X & Y? Because the body is sick, the mind is weak and the heart is full of fear and reluctant to get hurt again. It's hard, it's tough but it's do-able. To get healthy, get organized and once again get our priorities as the greatest nation on earth, straight.

Part Two of this interview will be posted on Wednesday July 11, 2007.

Got a question or comment for Joanne? Post in Comments below.

40 comments:

Anonymous said...

Great stuff, markadelphia. Really insightful and I hope these words resonate with many Americans who are in dire need of a wake up call

johnwaxey said...

Here's a question...so what if we are acting like an empire-building super power? We can beat the tar out of any country that gets in our way and I am benefiting from the actions that our country takes. Our gas is still some of the cheapest out there and I am making money. There hasn't been any terrorist attacks since 9-11 so I feel that the war in Iraq is working. My friends who work at GM and Ford and Lockhead and Boeing and Haliburton subsidiaries are employed and the the stock market is up.

I am doing great, if people around the world are suffering, so what? I don't have to see them or hear them mostly (except in the liberal press) Isn't suffering a part of the human condition? Shouldn't those people work harder or be more like us anyway?

So I have to take my shoes off at the airport now and wait in line sometimes and someone might be listening in on my phone conversations...so what, I don't have anything important to say anyway.

Joanne, why shouldn't we do what we are doing? It is the strong who survive, let the weak fall by the side.

Anonymous said...

Uh oh. Has someone had a drippingingly cold glass of sarcasm this afternoon?

Hee Hee. I love it.

Anonymous said...

Right. Like I am going to believe anything that someone who worked for Al Jazeera has said. Good lord, those people are the enemy.

Anonymous said...

John, it is simply not true that we haven't had any terrorist attacks since 9/11.

A mere month after 9/11 we were hit by a wave of anthrax attacks directed at Democratic senators and members of the media. Five people died, 17 were infected, and millions were scared out of their wits. Many of the victims were completely innocent people not connected with the targets in any way.

In May, 2002 the "Smiley Face Bomber" injured six people by putting pipe bombs in mailboxes across the Midwest.

In October, 2002 John Allan Muhammed and Lee Boyd Malvo terrorized Washington, DC, and the rest of the America in a series of sniper attacks that killed 10 people and injured three.

And every few months we have another school shooting in which 10, or 20 or 30 people are gunned down in these United States.

Now, you'll probably argue that all those don't count because those are American terrorists, serial killers, wackos, or, in the anthrax case, CIA agents scaring the pants off Americans to ensure the passage of the Patriot Act.

But even given that, almost every day in Iraq American soldiers, contractors and government employees are killed by Iraqi and Al Qaeda terrorists. More Americans have now died in Iraq than died in 9/11, and tens of thousands more are horribly crippled and maimed. Many, many thousands more are victims of PTSD and being shafted by the military.

Does it really make any difference whether Al Qaeda kills Americans on the streets of New York, or kills American National Guard members on the streets of Baghdad? Dead Americans are dead Americans no matter where they die.

Conservatives love to think that America defeated the Soviet Union by forcing the Russians to spend so much on their military that it destroyed their economy. But I think the proximate cause of the Soviet Union's collapse was the disastrous war in Afghanistan. That's the one where the Reagan administration funded the Taliban and bin Laden to fight the Russians.

Al Qaeda is now doing the same thing to us in Afghanistan -- yeah, the war you thought we won in 2001. It' still going on, and it's not really going our way. But they've moved into Iraq now too, under the cover of the total mayhem that Bush's sheer incompetency brought.

Al Qaeda only had to spend a few thousand dollars on airline tickets to force us to spend trillions on "security." There is no way that we can afford to do that for very long. We cannot beat them militarily. We have to shame them out of existence, make the world love us again and hate the terrorists for the monsters that they are.

But when we run roughshod over the people of the Middle East for the benefit of multinational oil companies, we create more enemies for ourselves, and give Al Qaeda a billion allies who will fund and shelter them. As long as our government is a proxy for Big Oil we are in for a boatload of hurt.

Anonymous said...

The American news media are not as bad as their detractors insist. If you paid attention to reputable American news sources you would have gotten a fairly accurate picture of what was happening in the Middle East.

The Washington Post, New York Times, National Public Radio, public television, Time Magazine and even CNN reported in detail on what was happening in Afghanistan with the Taliban and bin Laden prior to 9/11. They all reported on the Al Qaeda bombings in Africa in 1998, the subsequent bombing of a Sudanese factory in retaliation for that country's hosting of bin Laden, and our pursuit of bin Laden into Afghanistan.

They reported on the atrocities that the Taliban perpetrated on the Afghan people, how they treated women like animals and even how they destroyed the statues of Buddha at Bamiyan.

Average Americans were just not paying attention. They didn't understand the implications of what all that meant, and how it was connected to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, or the Gulf War and the basing of US forces in Saudi Arabia (which was bin Laden's motivation for the attacks on the United States).

The more popular news media try to sugarcoat the news and dumb it down to make it more attractive, but we just aren't interested.

What should they have said in 1998 when bin Laden hit the embassies? "Listen up, stupid. This is important. This bin Laden guy is bad news. He could do something really terrible. He already tried blowing up the World Trade Center in 1993, and he's not going to give up."

The problem is that there dozens of guys like bin Laden every day. Americans are tired of hearing about it and would rather have someone else worry. So they vote for the guys who sound the most militaristic and think that they've done their duty.

The problem is really with Americans. Too many of us are fat, lazy and greedy. We don't care about anyone else, and we act like it. This macho attitude might feel good, but it engenders a great deal of hatred.

When your entire country is perceived as a hypocritical bully, you're going to have a lot of problems.

Anonymous said...

Right on, blk.

The self centered attitude of Americans, especially those of conservative ilk, are the real cause of 9-11 and basically will be the cause of any future terrorist attacks. We are fat, lazy, greedy and don't, in fact, care about anyone else.

Oddly, when some of us say things like this we are told that we "hate America." Hmmm, maybe we want the fat, lazy, macho jerks to stop running our country and giving us a bad name. As you say, blk, those are the ones that truly hate America.

Anonymous said...

Amazing comments above, very intelligent and thought provoking, just saw some of the feedback from yesterday's post, it's morning my time here, i have to run and will throw in my thoughts in a few, it's 2am Eastern! :) Good morning cool America.

Anonymous said...

Amazing comments, indeed… I was thinking exactly the same thing. Amazingly unintelligent... Amazingly narrow minded... Amazingly bizarre…

Joanne, I do have a question for you. What thoughts run through your mind when you see Al Jazzeera publish video of contractors (who are there helping the Middle East) being beheaded? Does it take a bit of time after so stirring an event or is finding the moral equivalence relatively unproblematic?

Anonymous said...

Amazing comment Michelle. That will solve the problem - assigning blame. Will score political points I'm sure, what a proactive approach!!!! That's using the old bean!!!

So Michelle, who do you blame for the murder of catholics in the Phillipines? Or the bombings in Bali? Those fat, macho right-wingers in Glasgow had it coming to them right? Picadilly Circus on London is a hotbed of conservative thought too I hear.

johnwaxey said...

It is hilarious that those who find sensationalist fault with Al Jazzeera don't include Fox News as being worthy of criticism! Let me be the first...they are both entertainment...nothing more, nothing less. Credible sources of news? Yeah, right. That being said, all sources of information have something to say, some nugget of truth, but in order to refine that truth, a wise person must use multiple sources to cross-check and recheck. That is one of the huge issues with a lot of Americans, not enough time in the day, not enough interest to do the work that it takes to find out the truth. A shear reluctance to even entertain the notion that Al Jazzeera might have something important to say.

Sarge, you're not one of these people that think everyone in the Middle East is the enemy are you? And if you are, how is it that you can expect to win a war there? What are the terms of engagement then and didn't you attend any classes on modern history about the number of successes there have been in fighting wars at the scale of the continent or culture area? Name one war that was "won" at that level. WWII...maybe. The Korean War created the mess we have there now, Vietnam ended in a pull-out, the Gulf War created the mess we have now, Panama was a surgical strike as was the Falkland Islands (small conflicts with small, insignificant enemies that ended very quickly), the current Gulf War will not end any time soon, WWI created WWII, the Balkan conflict...small region, limited to more or less one country...Looks fairly grim Sarge. One has to go back to really the 19th century...maybe War of 1812, or the Civil War...the 18th century...the Revolutionary War. Truth is Sarge, you don't seem to know who the enemy is...not really. For folks like you it is really "them" or "turban heads" or "sand niggers" or whatever the new term is. While that might work for you, it really makes fighting a winnable war impossible because there is an endless source of enemies. But maybe that is the point...fighting a war that never ends...a conveyor belt that feeds human lives and money into a giant meat grinder to put out victory sausages at the end..and who doesn't like sausage?

Mark Ward said...

Hey Joanne,

I never got to comment on your answers but I would like to now, especially after just dave left his comment here.

Unfortunetly I think you are slightly naive in thinking that "the body is sick, the mind is weak and the heart is full of fear and reluctant to get hurt again." We are sick because we want to be sick. In looking at just Dave's comment above this one, you should hopefully clearly see that.

In order to solve the problems we have, we first have to admit that there are problems. Around 40 million of us cannot see the things you are talking about. They think they are "Amazingly unintelligent... Amazingly narrow minded... Amazingly bizarre."

I won't speak for Joanne but dave have you ever stopped and thought for a second that maybe people don't think we are "helping" in the Middle East? I mean, how would you feel if 150,000 thousand Al Qaeda troops took over Mexico and told us that they were just "helping." Given the testimony of people like John Perkins as well the troops that have actually been to Iraq, what is it going to take for you to admit that WE have behaved in a morally reprehensible way?

You'll get no argument from me--and Joanne either, I'm sure--that Al Qaeda is evil and there are several groups in the Middle East are morally wrong. So the answer is to.....act just like them? Sheesh.

Mark Ward said...

Foul, John, Foul! You can't accuse ol Sarge of being racist. Didn't you read page 52, paragraph 4, subsection 2 of the Neocon talking points manual? I am quoting:

"When accused of being racist, accuse your accuser of being "mean" or "unfair." Being the pussies that they are, the silly liberal will then feel guilty and back off, thus forgetting the fact that we all know to be true: White Americans are always right and all the brown people over there want to kill us, which we all know isn't the slightest bit racist."

johnwaxey said...

I didn't use the word racist even once...I am simply noting that the word "they" was applied to a non-defined group of people who may or may not have had anything to do with the 9-11 bombings or terrorist activities in Iraq.

Not being a racist is a very difficult thing to do as a human being and in EVERY culture there is an undercurrent of racism. The real issue is to fight against using what comes naturally as a means to make decisions and categorize people for second-class citizenship or earmark people for genocide. We are all racist to some degree or another. For Sarge, being a military man, I would think he would see the benefits of identifying specific enemies for the purpose of eliminating a threat rather than making enemies where none need to exist.

Anonymous said...

The Muslim culture is born and bred to violence. The fact that they happen to have a different color skin is immaterial. Their prophet, Mohammed, was a warrior and has taught his followers to engage people with violence, not words.

Anonymous said...

Great. Now "intelligent" liberals on here are inventing charges of racism even when none were made (as admitted by the author himself). Sure makes me want to engage people in debate on here.

Mark Ward said...

I was speaking of this line....

"For folks like you it is really "them" or "turban heads" or "sand niggers" or whatever the new term is."

and waiting for the inevitable outcry of racism backlash from folks like the sarge...

johnwaxey said...

So, then, for Sarge, all Muslims are the enemy? Is this correct? My question still stands...how do you expect to win a war in this region given the breadth of the enemy? Are we talking about genocide then? And that is different from the Nazis how?

Seems fairly clear that decade after decade of violent conflict in the modern era has not seen the end of Muslims...nor the hatred and violence towards the West and its allies and if we go way back to the Crusades, we are talking about a thousand years. Seems like we need to refine our concept of the enemy rather than expand it. What do you think?

Although racism was not invoked, how does everyone feel about Sarge's use of terminology about Muslim culture (regardless of skin color)? Would the blanket statement about Muslim culture and the followers of Muhammad fall into the catchall of racism? Just wondering for those of you out there that feel persecuted by the use of the term "racist"

Anonymous said...

i love this page, it is so diverse and alive and intelligent and thoughtful and very plain funny at times in observing and commenting on a LOT... where to begin?! :)

Got back & i'll be posting feedbacks (to those who requested) and just my thoughts within asap :-)

Anonymous said...

John Waxey :)

Our gas is still some of the cheapest out there...

The price of a barrel of crude oil was $32 bucks on the stock markets just before the war in March 2003, it's now $65+ a barrel with many analysts saying it could easily reach $75-$80 within a year and VERY easily top $100 if there are moves towards new strikes in the Persian Gulf. Americans pay the price of war at the pump, the national average price of a gallon of unleaded gas was $1.53 in March 2003, in June 2007 it was $3.068 a gallon... imagine that post a new conflict... Iraq, the region's potentially 2nd largest producer, is pumping far LESS oil AFTER our 2003 invasion than it was with a dictator we got rid of to replace with daily massacres and the sound of freedom reigning.

And I'm making money...

Americans are making money when they work, but the majority barely survive their bill cycles. There is widespread poverty sadness and discontent in the richest nation on earth that should VERY comfortably provide equal employment education and life-improvement opportunities for all. Employment is no longer a guarantee of health insurance and many small businesses and lower-paid Americans can't afford to cover their workers themselves or their families due to ever higher premiums by the insurance giants -- even though 7 out of 10 uninsured Americans are in full time employment. Health care workers, policemen, firefighters, paramedics, nurses and other public service professionals, already some of America's lowest paid, lost their right to overtime pay in 2003 due to new legislation. The government outlined ways for corporations to structure their workforce in 2003 so that they could eliminate overtime compansation for the lowest paid workers across the board to increase unprecedented profits. 100 million Americans work an average of 12-15 hours more a week and take home the same or less dollar value pay than the generations 25-35 years before them did.

GM, Ford and Chrysler have laid off more than 25,000 workers in the US and Canada since 2001, an economic downturn predicted by the US Labour Department before September 11th...

BLK answered your point about new attacks since 9/11, which don't cover the average 4-6 US soldier deaths a day in Iraq and equal (if not higher) but never officially revealed numbers of (the 100,000+)US military contractor deaths per day in Iraq...

I know you're playing devil's advocate to get me to talk :) but I had an early start today and the caffeine is definitely wearing off.. so as to your real basic question: 'Joanne, why shouldn't we do what we are doing? It is the strong who survive, let the weak fall by the side.'

I have 'Office' desktop signs, some very funny ones, that someone gave me a few years ago, and one of my favourites (apart from: 'If you stay calm whilst all around you is chaos...then you probably haven't understood... the seriousness of the situation') is: 'CHAOS, PANIC & DISORDER. My work here is done.'

If we think we can unleash and spread Chaos death and destruction throughout the world without being touched or pained by the blowback of our policies, then we are living in our politicians' fantasy island world and lack of recognition of WHAT WE ARE DOING and WHAT THAT IS CAUSING and how people are regarding us as a direct result, is not going to strengthen the United States, its democracy principles or values but will unravel them by our own hands and lead to a hard-landing reality downfall, to use an economic term.

One at a time...

Anonymous said...

Just Dave...

'What thoughts run through your mind when you see Al Jazzeera publish video of contractors (who are there helping the Middle East) being beheaded? Does it take a bit of time after so stirring an event or is finding the moral equivalence relatively unproblematic?'

Firstly, no military contractor in Iraq has been beheaded Just Dave, ordinary Iraqis by the boatloads have though by the 'new phenomenon' of Al Qaeda in Iraq. Non-existent there pre our invasion. Al Jazeera has not broadcast a single beaheading of a single American, Westerner, Iraqi or Arab since it went on air in 1996 to 2007. I'm assuming however that you're referring to the gruesome shots (broadcast by CNN, Fox, NBC, ABC, CBS, BBC etc AS WELL as Al Jazeera..) of the 2004 burning of dead bodies and bridge hanging of corpses of the 4 'Blackwater' US military contractors by joyful Iraqis in 2004. What runs through my head when i see those pictures? The same complete disbelief and shock that you don't mention experiencing running through your head, when you watched (as i did) joyful US networks across the board broadcast millions of tonnes of the most lethal military hardware shock and awe the life out of entire Iraqi neighbourhoods and cities, lasting hours and every night, killing thousands in Baghdad, Najaf, Mosul, Tikrit, Nassiriyeh, in March and April 2003 to Rocky music on our TV screens and anchors and news graphic stings cheering on the carpet slaughter (which looked rather picturesque to music by night) as the greatest act of patriotism since the Revolution.

Why are you apparently disturbed by one distrubing fact and not the others? Why is it morally reprehensible for iraqis to cheer the deaths and mutiliations of American military contractors, a military whom they witnessed invading bombing dividing and occupying their homeland, which is never now going to be free of the Americans as they see it unless they kill enough of them, an actively pursued policy and belief of the vast majority of Iraqis, as they point out themselves on arab sat channels every day of the week, but you don't mention as morally reprehensible our act of invading or killing them and more importantly, their country, the only thing they love and have.

Anonymous said...

Yes Markadelphia, i have been naive to put it like that, too true.

Anonymous said...

Sarge..

The Muslim culture is born and bred to violence. The fact that they happen to have a different color skin is immaterial. Their prophet, Mohammed, was a warrior and has taught his followers to engage people with violence, not words.

I'm guessing you get your information on Islam from the Falwell Radio network or John Hagee strand of thought. Many muslims are blonde and green or blue eyed, many (millions) are chinese or indian or indonesian or russian or european or south american or (and here's what YOU were referring to...) Arab, a lot of arab muslims are also blonde and green or blue eyed. Arabs make up around 20% of muslims, the rest of the globe's muslims are NON Arab and often caucasian. The muslim culture is not born and bred to violence, though the modern american culture arguably is, with the thousands of hours of violence (& sexual imagery) we are exposed to from birth even in prelude to relationships which become an act of a series of violations or violence (i'm not talking about the willing playful or by consent kind between adults...) that damage our entire outlook on life and one another as objects of commercial or ruthless momentary opportunism or phsyical fulfillment, that is never fulfilling and leaves vacant souls crying out for human attention and understanding.

Their prohet Mohammed was not a warrior but for forty years of his life, a merchant, a contemplator of life and the beyond, a messenger of God form the age of 40, and a prophet. He taught his followers to engage people of the world and different faiths, especially people of the book or christians jews and zoroastrians, with words and acts of peace and with words of humility above all and human solidarity. War -- as in the Christian concept of Just War which has been perverted by modern politicians and zionist-leaning christians -- was never to be used as a destructive means to justify the political ends except in unavoidabl self-defense. His life and death, documented by Eastern and Western contempories and historians is a testimony to his teachings which billions currently respect and follow as a source of life guidance with the Islamic holy book, the Quran.

Anonymous said...

Markadelphia's clever ploy did not go unnoticed, sw. Yes, yes, yes we all know that all conservatives are racist according to people who used to be racist themselves (see: Southern Democrats like Robert Byrd)

As for Mrs Tucker's assessment of the Muslim culture, one need only look here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb

to see what we are truly up against. This is the origin of modern Islam and its war that it has been waging on the West for the last 50 years. There are many people in the Middle East that are following his path and THAT is what we are up against. You can call it whatever you like but in the end it's us or them.

Anonymous said...

Wow! I can actually say that I stand corrected. Search as I might, I was shocked that I couldn’t find evidence of Al Jazeera showing beheadings. Granted, I wouldn’t waste my time watching it (so I definitely spoke too soon) but I’ve listened to some interviews w/ these poison disseminating mouthpieces in other circles; and who’d have thought they didn’t relish something like that on their network? Gob-smacked I was…

I stand corrected in another way. I wrongly implied that Joanne was simply looking for moral equivalence. I don’t think that is the case; I think she just believes outright that the United States is the bay guy, and likely has thought this since well before the War on Terror ever began or anybody ever heard of George Bush.

Side bet: fiver say she’s got a little ‘che’ t-shirt in the closest for special occasions.

Anonymous said...

You are sooooooo funny Just Dave :| :]

You lost z bet :) but i've watched five (BBC and Channel 4) documentaries about his life and have 3 little books on my shelf (amongst many others including the current Admin's people of interest) of what he used to say / think -- so maybe it's a draw :) I like to look into what people have actually said and done before coming to any kind of conclusion about them.

The United States has lost its way. The US can't have it all its own way (correction, rephrase, the US meaning the major economic and political players when it should mean THE COUNTRY, can WANT to & TRY to have everything their own way...) but leave morality out of it please, give us credit for a brain and don't lie about our (Your Mr Pres's and Inner Circle's) motives actions or their consequences.

Anonymous said...

Sarge..

Sayyid Qutb is not the origin of modern islam, that's like saying, 'billy graham is the origin of modern chritianity.' The Reverend Billy Graham is a huge influence on millions of American evangelicals, but neither he as a very impressive example nor any of the self-aggrandised riff-raff of today's US cable media stars who seem to have forgotten Jesus, the extreme beauty and humility of his life as well as truth of his message in their accumulation of millions of dollars and preachings of ignorance and hate, represent the vast majority of Christians.

I've read much of Sayyid Qutb's writings, i studied Arabic as one of my languages at Cambridge University and he was a major historic figure, a lot of it has been taken out of context and customised to suit an anti-US imperialist world struggle view by the new Al Qaeda breed of leaders.

No figure replaces the prophet Mohammed, or those family members and disciples closest to him who expanded on his teachings, as the first and only major guides and influence on a muslim's life.

Al Qaeda very recently originated as a struggle against a new Western military, political and cultural drive into the Islamic heartland (Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Jerusalem etc..) and the globalisation of western culture at the expense of Islamic values and heritage.

So, it's ironic in fact that the West levels the same accusations against Islamists, that they're trying to take over and destroy our values or culture (President Bush made one speech of many similar in Virginia in October 2005, also in the film, in which he voices those fears and thoughts.)

In my view, it's US foreign policies plus a major breakdown in communication, understanding and dialogue between two vital global religions and cultures.

Just imagine how much we could have achieved and solved if this government (as well as others before it) backed by an overwhelmingly peace-leaning and hungry for knowledge nation after 9/11, would have channeled its strategy, energy and billions into defense of the realm through world culture therapy and peace initiatives and the improvement of lives and education at home, instead of endless war (including the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.)

Anonymous said...

It's a good basic axiom that if you take a quart of ice cream and a quart of dog poop and mix them together, the result will taste more like the latter than the former. That's the problem with the Che. Although it’s admirable that he saved those cats in his youth and takes a mighty fine portrait, I find it difficult to overlook murder, tyranny and his invention of the Cuban gulag system. I’ve read a bit about our friend ‘Che’ as well and it’s generally my litmus test on evaluating certain aspects of people. I lost the bet on the t-shirt, but I suspect I won the bet on your philosophy.

On a side note, in regards to your conversation with Sarge… Reasonable people can debate the merits of the carrot approach over the stick. However, it cases like this, I prefer to take the enemy at their word.

Zarqawi "We do not wage our jihad in order to replace the Western tyrant with an Arab tyrant. We fight to make God's word supreme, and anyone who stands in the way of our struggle is our enemy, a target of our swords."

Spokesman for the Islamic Army of Aden: (in reference to attacking a French ship): "We would have preferred to hit a US frigate, but no problem because they are all infidels."

Hussein Massawi (former leader of Hezbollah): "We are not fighting so that you will offer us something. We are fighting to eliminate you."

A famous holocaust survivor once said, “If someone tells you that they’re going to kill you; believe them.” That seems like sound advice to me.


And while I’m on a quoting kick…

…in regards to Americans living in “widespread poverty, sadness and discontent”…
An African immigrate was asked why he wanted to come to the United States. He replied, “I want to live in a land where even the poor are fat.”

Mark Ward said...

Dave, you either see it or you don't. I hate to be so black and white but maybe, in the end, that's what it comes down to....I see poverty in this country everyday that is not too dissimilar to the poverty in Africa.

I see America as being at least 50 percent respsonsible for "why they hate us." It's all there if you are willing to look. The simple truth is, as Joanne has said, if "backed by an overwhelmingly peace-leaning and hungry for knowledge nation after 9/11, the US would have channeled its strategy, energy and billions into defense of the realm through world culture therapy and peace initiatives and the improvement of lives and education at home."

Sure, we would have still had nutjobs running around trying to blow us up but not to the degree we do now. And the whole world would've been on our side, unlike now.

Anonymous said...

There simply can be no argument. If someone’s poor in America with 2 TVs, air conditioning and is overweight and you equate that with someone who’s without food altogether and living in fear or lions because they’re sleeping outside, then I cannot argue it. I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again, I look at apple and see an apple and you see an orange. From your perspective, it’s exactly the opposite. Argument is futile.

"backed by an overwhelmingly peace-leaning and hungry for knowledge nation after 9/11, the US would have channeled its strategy, energy and billions into defense of the realm through world culture therapy and peace initiatives and the improvement of lives and education at home."

…that’s crap. Just plain, hippy ‘spread the love’ crap.

Anonymous said...

I couldn't agree with you more, dave.

This is the bottom line. The people that we are fighting against want to institute Sharia law on the entire planet. This law basically states that either you convert, submit or die. It's just that simple. This type of law is directly incompatible with our country, a democratic one, so we are enemy number one. It's kill or be killed, people. Pick a side.

Anonymous said...

Here's another definition of crap. Crap is not knowing a region, its society culture religion people or politics -- and not having any desire to know anything that contradicts negative or politically spun preconceptions -- yet blindly or trustingly accepting as 'realistic' or enduring the spectacularly failed policies, which have killed hundreds of thousands MORE people (including thousands of our own at the altar of a self-protecting racket) than the event it was SUPPOSED to avenge.

Crap is continuing to believe lies long-exposed that the longer we deceive ourselves about the failure of these policies and the longer we instigate or spread violence hate and thousands upon thousands of individual cases for revenge, the more we will win (unless of course, our definition of 'winning' is to spread terror, prolong war and build more billion dollar weapons systems to enrich 0.03% of the US population.)

Crap is the failure to ELIMINATE completely poverty injustice and corruption in our own blessed but criminally administered society, while being the first to criticise these failings elsewhere, at the same time institutionalising the impoverishment of entire nations through the plunder of natural riches and billion dollar debt imposition and military or economic ties with the most corrupt extreme or undemocratic regimes on the planet.

Crap is hypocrisy, hypocrisy when it comes to morality, politics, measures for success or failure which ALWAYS apply to others, never ourselves and the hypocrisy of claiming a mission to protect and spread our values or principles in the world when we don;t practise those principles at home and when our very actions weaken and undermine them.

The love of freedom homeland and democracy lives everywhere, in all people, and we (or those responsible) are crap to weaken it domestically through ultra-secretive practises and the politics of cronyism, while taking it and human lives away from people (often fellow christians) in soverign nations, in which we have no business plundering or imposing 'reality.'

It's a mirage and the sooner we fix the problem, collectively, not wade deeper into the river of blood like Macbeth who can't turn back, who can't even SEE the shore any more, the better we will feel as a nation and the more God will bless us for remembering WHY he blessed us in the first place.

Anonymous said...

Yawn…

Same stuff, different day… That neither impresses me nor moves me. (But, then again, I’m sure you couldn’t care less either.)

Anonymous said...

I have a great idea. Why don'tthe sarge, just dave, sw, the rev, pl, and crabmaster scratch (if he is still reading) get together with all those folks in the Islamic world that also think that violence and human suffering is the only solution to solving problems (bin laden, zawahari, ammenijad etc) and go live an island somewhere where they can maim and slaughter each other to their hearts content.

The rest of us can then our lives in peace without the din of the hate mongers shouting over us.

Sharia law...sarge you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

Mark Ward said...

What is it with conservaties and the Sharia law thing lately? Was there some tape series release by the Patriot lately?

My question for you, sarge, is this: if all Muslims want Sharia law in the world, why are they not united? Why do they fight each other constantly and murder each other like they do in Iraq? For such a "scary" enemy to be so splintered...it seems terribly self-defeating.

Anonymous said...

The fact that they do fight and kill each other should prove to you how little they regard human life. The main message all of these groups are getting is that America must be extinguished.

johnwaxey said...

Still patiently waiting for an answer to the question of how we are going to win a war in that region...ANSWER THE QUESTION. We get the point that you feel threatened and that is us vs. them....now ANSWER THE QUESTION. Stop disseminating and trying to change the subject. ANSWER THE QUESTION. Still waiting on the examples of successful military campaigns at a similar scale as well. You can feel free to answer too, Just Dave. Oh, and while you are at it, how is the rhetoric you are spouting now different from the Red Scare?

Anonymous said...

We win the war in the region by doing the same thing we did in WWII. In Japan, we firebombed them, nuked them and only then did they finally give up. In Germany we firebombed Dresden and they still didn't give up. These days we are way to nice and pc about it and that is why we are losing. The enemy knows this and they take adavantage of it. Until we lay waste to large portions of that area of the world, we will lose battle after battle.

Anonymous said...

Cool, that's what Rumsfeld thought too. You're in sync and good company. Bummer that they lost a cool guy like that who spoke his mind and exuded strength. Here are a few powerful Rummie thoughts on the subject.

'The U.S. bombed Japan for three and a half years, until August 1945, before they accomplished their objectives.

On the European front, the allies bombed Germany continually for five years, from September 1940 until May of '45.

Took 11 months to start the land campaign against the Germans with the invasion of North Africa.

And it took the United States two years and six months after Hitler declared war before we landed in France in June of 1944.

We're now fighting a new kind of war. It's unlike any that America has ever fought before. Many things about this war are different from others. But as I have said, one of those differences is not the possibility of instant victory or instant success.'

(And Feb 2 2006 WPost..)
The United States is engaged in what could be a generational conflict akin to the Cold War, the kind of struggle that might last decades as allies work to root out terrorists across the globe and battle extremists who want to rule the world, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said yesterday.

Rumsfeld, who laid out broad strategies for what the military and the Bush administration are now calling the "long war," likened al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden to Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin while urging Americans not to give in on the battle of wills that could stretch for years...

johnwaxey said...

So, to win this war we have to bomb someone. Who exactly are we going to bomb? Lets say we lay waste to all of Iraq. Drop a nuke on Baghdad, one each on each of the strongholds...the whole deal.

First off, then we are no longer there to help people out or encourage a democratic society, so we have defeated the purpose of our latest mission there. Second, you don't think that is not going to escalate the conflict into a nuclear holocaust? You don't think that Pakistan won't retaliate? You don't think that North Korea won't sell or give away nukes to whoever asks for them? You don't think the ecological disaster that the radioactive hole that will be Iraq will not blow back into our environment? How many countries will we have to eliminate to get them all? You don't think that you can kill everyone do you? Because everyone that you leave alive will be a candidate for terrorist school. The next Bin Laden so to speak. I don't think you have thought this one through Sarge. Not really at all.

As for the comparison to WWII...do you not get that the Japanese were a cohesive government that could speak for its people? This is not the case in the Middle East in regards to terrorists. Those people speak only for themselves and do not form a cohesive or recognized government for any country. You cannot fight a conventional war against terrorists. This is why guerrilla warfare has succeeded in almost every instance that it has been applied. That is why there are no successful wars that you can use as examples to compare to this one.

For a military man Sarge, you sure don't seem to have a strategic or tactical grip on this war that you so strongly advocate for. Plenty of rhetoric though, you get an A+ for that.

Lets face facts, the only way to win this war was to have not engaged in it in the first place. Let that sink in for a bit, run all of the possibilities through your head, there is no other logical conclusion.